2019 AWARDS
Patrick S. Casey
Founding and Managing Member,
Casey & Chapman, PLLC
Sandra M. Chapman
Founding Member,
Casey & Chapman, PLLC
Photo by Don Feenerty/Feenerty Photography.
BY KATLIN SWISHER. Patrick Casey and
Sandra Chapman were first-year law
students at West Virginia University
(WVU) College of Law in the early 1980s
when they met.
“As Patrick tells it, he sat in the back of
the classroom, and I sat in the front,” says
Chapman. “He wore jeans, and I dressed
up. To this day we continue to have
different approaches to our practice.”
Their firm, Casey & Chapman, PLLC,
was a dream many years in the making.
After nearly 30 years of practicing at
other firms, the married couple took
a leap of faith and opened their own lit-
igation practice in Wheeling, WV, in
2011. In addition to handling a variety of
types of cases, they share the day-to-day
responsibilities of business ownership.
Casey oversees facilities management,
information technology, billing, finance
and accounting while Chapman handles
business related to infrastructure, person-
nel, marketing and fee collections.
“The decision to start our own firm
arose out of a desire for control and inde-
pendence from the constraints of mono-
lithic, lock-step law firms,” says Casey.
“We wanted to represent clients our own
way, and we wanted to innovate with
technology. The growth has been rapid.
Within two years we were able to purchase
a great building in downtown Wheeling
across from the federal courthouse, and
we have diversified the practice.”
Practice diversification and professional
satisfaction have been achieved over the
years by choosing the right cases: med-
ical malpractice, long-term health care,
employment discrimination, product
94
WEST VIRGINIA EXECUTIVE
liability, insurance coverage, education,
energy-related litigation, estate litigation
and motor vehicle accidents on both the
defense and plaintiff sides.
While Casey and Chapman share a
commitment to practicing law in a way
that achieves the best outcomes for their
clients, their individual strengths and
interests allow them to have an impact
on their community and their neighbors.
For Chapman, that has meant getting
involved in education, the arts and the
bar association.
A fierce advocate for K-12 and higher
education, Chapman was appointed to
the West Virginia Board of Education
by Governor Gaston Caperton, where
she completed a nine-year term. She also
served on the West Virginia Secondary
Schools Activities Commission and the
West Virginia School Building Author-
ity. She was appointed to West Liberty
University’s board of governors by Gov-
ernor Earl Ray Tomblin in 2013.
“While serving the state board of
education, we rotated around the state for
meeting locations, and I learned there is a
dividing line in the state—all of the regions
think differently and process information
differently. It was very enlightening,” she
says. “Thanks to that involvement, I ac-
quired an excellent understanding of board
roles versus staff roles and how those roles
are supposed to work together. More than
anything, my involvement in education
has taught me about the state and state
government, and it inspired me to broad-
en my involvement, leading me to accept
additional board positions.”
Chapman is also committed to the
legal profession and has led in various
administrative, advisory and mentorship
roles, including service on the executive
council of the National Conference of Bar
Presidents. She served on the advisory
committee to the governor pertaining to
judicial appointments and on the Inde-
pendent Commission on Judicial Reform
under Governor Joe Manchin. The work
of the commission led to analysis and
consideration of significant changes to
the selection of judges, judicial campaign
finance and the administration of justice
in West Virginia.
“The commission received and consid-
ered information and material from the
National Center for State Courts and from
many other studies and applications that
might fit our state,” she says. “Delibera-
tions were positive and all with common
goals, including improving the judicial
system and the perception of the judicial
system. Once the commission members
received various research and comments,
a success was informing others about
other states’ perspectives, various op-
tions, what to consider, what might be
improved and what time frames would
be necessary. It is easy to be critical of the